NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information

[abctc]

how create nxt address with the client

- press the orange "lock" icon at the top left corner, and then type a really long secret phrase. The green numbers near the open "lock" icon stands for your account #.

[1713485471]

1713485471

[1713485471]

1713485471

[1713485471]

1713485471

[1713485471]

1713485471

[1713485471]

1713485471

[abctc]

Any1 selling NXT, about 1 BTC worth?

- there is exchange: http://dgex.com/

and Trading Thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=345336.0

[crazybonkers]

how create nxt address with the client

Click the padlock on the top left of the client... Enter a very long pass phrase (numbers and letters). Click OK and your account id is in green next to the padlock.

KEEP YOUR PASS PHRASE PRIVATE AND SAFE

[crazybonkers]

Speaking of pass phrases... Can you use caps and any other characters such as $£"!)(:>< and so on?

[ImmortAlex]

You can use even national characters.

[crazybonkers]

You can use even national characters.

Good to know... Time for an even stronger pass phrase for me then 

[mcjavar]

I´ve read a very interesting post which I would like to share with you.

"I think everyone here will agree that NXT is an interesting concept - and I think that implementing it first in Java was a great choice for getting more developers on board. However, I think there is a seriously problem with NXT, and indeed proof-of-stake in general: that of pooled mining.

As with all modern decentralized crypto-currencies, an even spread of influence is desirable: Bitcoin would hardly work if all of the hashing power belonged to one group. Similarly with a proof-of-stake currency, the total wealth needs to be spread across many real world owners, each with small balances, for the system to work.

Small influence leads to small block solving power and so less steady mining returns. Bitcoin solves this through pooled mining. Pooled mining in Bitcoin is particularly elegant since very little trust is required between the pool operator and the owner of the hashing power. Can we do the same in NXT? Solving blocks in NXT requires signing them with an account private key, a good balance and considerable luck. Thus, pooled mining in NXT requires either;

handing over the private key to the pool, without the pool owner running off with the account funds;
trusting the signer to pay back the pool if the get lucky;
or some clever crypto to guarantee one of the above

At present, none of these options are both desirable and possible. So with this in mind, how will NXT work at all?"

What do you think about this?

[abctc]

Bitcoin would hardly work if all of the hashing power belonged to one group. Similarly with a proof-of-stake currency ...

- no, PoS more safe then PoW, because big stakeholders aren't interested in attack on the currency.

[mcjavar]

Bitcoin would hardly work if all of the hashing power belonged to one group. Similarly with a proof-of-stake currency ...

- no, PoS more safe then PoW, because big stakeholders aren't interested in attack on the currency.

But what if I have a lot of NXT and am nopt spending them, just holding them and "mining"? this means that I will have more and more NXT, which can lead to market distortion.

[SpeedDemon13]

Still not completely understanding how to get NXT coins. I got it running, show the peers and blocks on the GUI on localhost:7875.

Code:

C:\Users\USER\Desktop\nxt>"C:\Program Files (x86)\Java\jre7\bin\java" -jar start.jar
2013-12-03 23:30:06.148:INFO:oejs.Server:main: jetty-9.1.0.v20131115
2013-12-03 23:30:06.187:INFO:oejdp.ScanningAppProvider:main: Deployment monitor [file:/C:/Users/USER/Desktop/nxt/webapps/] at interval 1
[2013-12-03 23:30:07.380] Nxt 0.3.7 started.
[2013-12-03 23:30:07.409] Loading transactions...
[2013-12-03 23:30:07.726] ...Done
[2013-12-03 23:30:07.727] Loading peers...
[2013-12-03 23:30:07.761] Loading blocks...
[2013-12-03 23:30:10.621] ...Done
[2013-12-03 23:30:10.622] Loading accounts...
[2013-12-03 23:30:10.716] ...Done
[2013-12-03 23:30:10.718] Loading assets...
[2013-12-03 23:30:10.720] ...Done
[2013-12-03 23:30:10.720] Loading orders...
[2013-12-03 23:30:10.722] ...Done
2013-12-03 23:30:10.743:INFO:oejsh.ContextHandler:main: Started o.e.j.w.WebAppContext@1fce83e{/,file:/C:/Users/USER/Desktop/nxt/webapps/root/,AVAILABLE}{C:\User
s\USER\Desktop\nxt\webapps\root}
2013-12-03 23:30:10.778:INFO:oejs.ServerConnector:main: Started ServerConnector@301ea4{HTTP/1.1}{0.0.0.0:7874}
[2013-12-03 23:38:55.129] 23: java.nio.channels.WritePendingException
[2013-12-03 23:39:16.551] 3: java.nio.channels.ClosedChannelException
[2013-12-03 23:40:05.535] 23: java.nio.channels.WritePendingException
[2013-12-03 23:40:09.644] 23: java.nio.channels.WritePendingException
[2013-12-03 23:40:17.960] 23: java.nio.channels.WritePendingException
[2013-12-03 23:41:33.293] 23: java.nio.channels.WritePendingException
[2013-12-03 23:41:58.285] 23: java.nio.channels.WritePendingException
[2013-12-03 23:42:11.311] 23: java.nio.channels.WritePendingException
[2013-12-03 23:42:25.538] 23: java.nio.channels.WritePendingException
[2013-12-03 23:44:28.572] 17: java.nio.channels.WritePendingException
[2013-12-03 23:45:27.370] 23: java.nio.channels.WritePendingException
[2013-12-03 23:45:27.370] 23: java.nio.channels.WritePendingException
[2013-12-03 23:45:39.445] 23: java.nio.channels.WritePendingException
[2013-12-03 23:45:57.188] 23: java.nio.channels.WritePendingException
[2013-12-03 23:46:42.985] 23: java.nio.channels.WritePendingException
[2013-12-03 23:46:53.106] 23: java.nio.channels.WritePendingException
[2013-12-03 23:47:05.347] 1: java.nio.channels.WritePendingException
[2013-12-03 23:47:05.349] 17: java.nio.channels.WritePendingException

Is everything working ok?

[Vega]

I´ve read a very interesting post which I would like to share with you.

"I think everyone here will agree that NXT is an interesting concept - and I think that implementing it first in Java was a great choice for getting more developers on board. However, I think there is a seriously problem with NXT, and indeed proof-of-stake in general: that of pooled mining.

I've been wondering about this for a while now. I think this is one of the problems than needs to be addressed soon, if not in implementation, in theory at least.

The option to handing over large amount of currency to a person who runs a pool is not realistic, safe, or efficient. (However it's interesting in case of exchanges and such, because they can make profit with your coins, so fees should be lower.)

The best solution would be if there would be a pool mining (proofing?) mechanism integrated into Nxt itself. A way to sign over the mining rights of coins to a collective while maintaining ownership over the coins.

[Come-from-Beyond]

Some feedback for you dev:

I got error and couldn't open "localhost:7875" for both 0.3.5 and 0.3.6 yesterday and now. This error is on win XP system, but I can run succesfully on my laptop Windows 7 system. So I'm wondering whether the client has some problems on Win XP system.

Code:

[2013-12-04 09:27:38.750] Loading assets...
[2013-12-04 09:27:38.750] ...Done
[2013-12-04 09:27:38.750] Loading orders...
[2013-12-04 09:27:38.750] ...Done
2013-12-04 09:27:38.985:INFO:oejsh.ContextHandler:main: Started o.e.j.w.WebAppCo
ntext@1fe7c2f{/,file:/F:/nxt-0.3.6/nxt/webapps/root/,AVAILABLE}{F:\nxt-0.3.6\nxt
\webapps\root}
2013-12-04 09:27:39.313:INFO:oejs.ServerConnector:main: Started ServerConnector@
a7041a{HTTP/1.1}{0.0.0.0:7874}
[2013-12-04 09:28:38.970] 7: java.io.IOException: 由于线程退出或应用程序请求，已
放弃 I/O 操作。

[2013-12-04 09:28:38.985] 8: java.io.IOException: 由于线程退出或应用程序请求，已
放弃 I/O 操作。

Thank you. Both exceptions happened in code that accepts connections (7 == client, 8 == bot). Unfortunatelly, I can't translate those funny symbols...

[Come-from-Beyond]

Feedback: Ver: 0.3.7
Got this error and application stops running normally.
Physical memory used 139M, with plenty of free RAM left.

Code:

2013-12-03 22:52:36.691:WARN:oejs.ServletHandler:qtp12201544-22005: Error for /nxt
java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space
2013-12-03 22:52:35.945:WARN:oejut.QueuedThreadPool:qtp12201544-22387:
java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space
2013-12-03 22:53:00.473:WARN:oejut.QueuedThreadPool:qtp12201544-22399:
java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space
2013-12-03 22:52:59.737:WARN:oejut.QueuedThreadPool:qtp12201544-22407:
java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space
2013-12-03 22:53:04.970:WARN:oejut.QueuedThreadPool:qtp12201544-22418:
java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space
2013-12-03 22:52:58.633:WARN:oejut.QueuedThreadPool:qtp12201544-22401:
java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space
2013-12-03 22:52:57.891:WARN:oejut.QueuedThreadPool:qtp12201544-22415:
java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space

Thank you. Have u used "-Xms512m" and "-Xmx1024m" BTW?

[Come-from-Beyond]

I´ve read a very interesting post which I would like to share with you.

"I think everyone here will agree that NXT is an interesting concept - and I think that implementing it first in Java was a great choice for getting more developers on board. However, I think there is a seriously problem with NXT, and indeed proof-of-stake in general: that of pooled mining.

As with all modern decentralized crypto-currencies, an even spread of influence is desirable: Bitcoin would hardly work if all of the hashing power belonged to one group. Similarly with a proof-of-stake currency, the total wealth needs to be spread across many real world owners, each with small balances, for the system to work.

Small influence leads to small block solving power and so less steady mining returns. Bitcoin solves this through pooled mining. Pooled mining in Bitcoin is particularly elegant since very little trust is required between the pool operator and the owner of the hashing power. Can we do the same in NXT? Solving blocks in NXT requires signing them with an account private key, a good balance and considerable luck. Thus, pooled mining in NXT requires either;

handing over the private key to the pool, without the pool owner running off with the account funds;
trusting the signer to pay back the pool if the get lucky;
or some clever crypto to guarantee one of the above

At present, none of these options are both desirable and possible. So with this in mind, how will NXT work at all?"

What do you think about this?

I got a message of BCNext regarding this. He is thinking about changing the mining algo, a new approach will used Cunicula's proposal to assign a unique id to each coin. If this way is not flawed then we'll get trustless pooled mining. There are no details yet, the concept may be changed.

[mcjavar]

I´ve read a very interesting post which I would like to share with you.

"I think everyone here will agree that NXT is an interesting concept - and I think that implementing it first in Java was a great choice for getting more developers on board. However, I think there is a seriously problem with NXT, and indeed proof-of-stake in general: that of pooled mining.

I've been wondering about this for a while now. I think this is one of the problems than needs to be addressed soon, if not in implementation, in theory at least.

The option to handing over large amount of currency to a person who runs a pool is not realistic, safe, or efficient. (However it's interesting in case of exchanges and such, because they can make profit with your coins, so fees should be lower.)

The best solution would be if there would be a pool mining (proofing?) mechanism integrated into Nxt itself. A way to sign over the mining rights of coins to a collective while maintaining ownership over the coins.

Well, for me seems, that without this function, there is no point using it and the mass will not adopt at as they are suspicious with "pre mined" coins, even if this is a new technology. They need to get motivated to use the currency and "proof", to earn coins. Currently, with 100-2000 coins it is pointless to "proof" and it is not possible to get more then that coins for free. Dumping coins for free, on the other hand, will result in a price drop, which is also against the interest of the shareholders...

[laowai80]

So, can you explain to me real quick. Are all 1 bln. coins already mined?

[ImmortAlex]

So, can you explain to me real quick. Are all 1 bln. coins already mined?

Think they are exists forever. Like Earth, and Sun, and starts in the night sky.

[laowai80]

Think they are exists forever. Like Earth, and Sun, and starts in the night sky.

Ok, and what does this sentence mean from the first post?

"Coins are earned solely by charging transaction fees."

[mcjavar]

I´ve read a very interesting post which I would like to share with you.

"I think everyone here will agree that NXT is an interesting concept - and I think that implementing it first in Java was a great choice for getting more developers on board. However, I think there is a seriously problem with NXT, and indeed proof-of-stake in general: that of pooled mining.

As with all modern decentralized crypto-currencies, an even spread of influence is desirable: Bitcoin would hardly work if all of the hashing power belonged to one group. Similarly with a proof-of-stake currency, the total wealth needs to be spread across many real world owners, each with small balances, for the system to work.

Small influence leads to small block solving power and so less steady mining returns. Bitcoin solves this through pooled mining. Pooled mining in Bitcoin is particularly elegant since very little trust is required between the pool operator and the owner of the hashing power. Can we do the same in NXT? Solving blocks in NXT requires signing them with an account private key, a good balance and considerable luck. Thus, pooled mining in NXT requires either;

handing over the private key to the pool, without the pool owner running off with the account funds;
trusting the signer to pay back the pool if the get lucky;
or some clever crypto to guarantee one of the above

At present, none of these options are both desirable and possible. So with this in mind, how will NXT work at all?"

What do you think about this?

I got a message of BCNext regarding this. He is thinking about changing the mining algo, a new approach will used Cunicula's proposal to assign a unique id to each coin. If this way is not flawed then we'll get trustless pooled mining. There are no details yet, the concept may be changed.

That sounds good!!

But this won´t solve the issue that arise when someone already holds a lot of coins and is not spending them, just "proofing" and earning new coins. How to make sure, that one person can´t hold the majority of the coins?

[MikeH]

you need to update the first post, like to say you need at least 1 Nxt to mine Nxt - are you supposed to buy your first one or what?  seems dodgy.